Sei sulla pagina 1di 40

4

Asquith, G., and D. Krygowski, 2004, Porosity Logs, in G. Asquith and D. Krygowski, Basic Well Log Analy- sis: AAPG Methods in Exploration 16, p. 37–76.

Porosity Logs

GENERAL

The next class of well logs to be considered is gen- erally referred to as porosity logs. Although each pro- duces a porosity value from basic measurements, none actually measures porosity directly. Two such logs, the density and neutron, are nuclear measurements. A third log, the sonic, uses acoustic measurements, and the fourth and newest log senses the magnetic reso- nance of formation nuclei. When used individually, each of the first three has a response to lithology which must be accounted for, but when used in concert, two or three at a time, lithology can be estimated and a more accurate porosity derived.

NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE LOG

Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) logging was first introduced by Schlumberger in 1978 (Maute, 1992) but was not initially widely used because of operational limitations. With the commercial introduc- tion of the Magnetic Resonance Imaging Log (MRIL) by NUMAR Corporation (now part of Halliburton) in 1980 (Halliburton, 1999) and the release of the Com- binable Magnetic Resonance Tool (CMR) by Schlum- berger, the technique is steadily gaining acceptance. The measurement technique is closely related to medical Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) in that it senses the fluids in the formation surrounding the borehole (like MRI senses the fluids in the body) while the solids are largely invisible. In the logging tool, a powerful permanent magnet in the tool causes the protons in the formation fluids (mostly in the hydrogen) to align. An antenna in the tool then sends a signal into the formation, causing the protons to tip away from that original alignment. When the antenna signal is turned off, the protons begin to realign in the strong magnetic field, producing a signal called the spin echo. Repeated application of the antenna’s signal

leads to the measurement of many spin echoes, gath- ered as a spin echo train which is interpreted to esti- mate formation properties. Different interpretation and measurement methods lead to estimates of porosity, pore fluid types, and pore size distribution in the for- mation. Like the other porosity measurements, NMR measures mostly in the invaded and mixed zones of the formation around the wellbore. Unlike the other poros- ity measurements, the porosity determined from it is much less sensitive to lithologic changes than the porosities determined from those measurements. Because wide use of NMR logs is relatively new, this technique is often used alone in the determination of porosity rather than in concert with the other poros- ity tools (sonic, density, and neutron). For these rea- sons, NMR logging is considered separately in Chap- ter 6.

SONIC LOG

The sonic log is a porosity log that measures inter- val transit time (t, delta t, or DT) of a compressional sound wave traveling through the formation along the axis of the borehole. The sonic log device consists of one or more ultrasonic transmitters and two or more receivers. Modern sonic logs are borehole-compensat- ed (BHC) devices. These devices are designed to greatly reduce the spurious effects of borehole size variations (Kobesh and Blizard, 1959) as well as errors due to tilt of the tool with respect to the borehole axis (Schlumberger, 1972) by averaging signals from dif- ferent transmitter-receiver combinations over the same length of borehole. Interval transit time (t) in microseconds per foot, µsec/ft (or microseconds per meter, µsec/m) is the reciprocal of the velocity of a compressional sound wave in feet per second (or meters per second). Inter- val transit time (DT) is usually displayed in tracks 2 and 3 of a log (Figure 4.1). A sonic-derived porosity

38

ASQUITH AND KRYGOWSKI

curve (SPHI) is sometimes displayed in tracks 2 and 3, along with the DT curve. Track 1 usually contains a caliper (CALI), and a gamma ray (GR) or an SP. The interval transit time (t) is dependent upon both lithology and porosity. Therefore, a formation’s matrix interval transit time (Table 4.1) must be known to derive sonic porosity either by chart (Figure 4.2) or by the following formulas:

Wyllie time-average equation (Wyllie et al., 1958):

Wyllie time-average equation (Wyllie et al., 1958): 4.1 Raymer-Hunt-Gardner (RHG) equation (Raymer et al.,

4.1

Raymer-Hunt-Gardner (RHG) equation (Raymer et al., 1980):

Raymer-Hunt-Gardner (RHG) equation (Raymer et al., 1980): where: por osities of carbonates with vuggy or fracture

where:

porosities of carbonates with vuggy or fracture poros- ity are calculated by the Wyllie formula, porosity val- ues are too low. This happens because the sonic log only records matrix porosity rather than vuggy or frac- ture secondary porosity. The percentage of vuggy or fracture secondary porosity can be calculated by sub- tracting sonic porosity from total porosity. Total poros- ity values are obtained from one of the nuclear logs (i.e., density, neutron, or preferably the combination of density and neutron). The percentage of secondary porosity, called SPI or secondary porosity index, can be a useful mapping parameter in carbonate explo- ration. Where a sonic log is used to determine porosity in unconsolidated sands, an empirical compaction factor (C p ) should be added to the Wyllie et al. (1958) equa-

C p ) should be added to the Wyllie et al. (1958) equa- 4.3 4.2 tion:

4.3

4.2 tion:

φ S = sonic-derived porosity t ma = interval transit time in the matrix (Table 4.1) t log = interval transit time in the formation t fl = interval transit time in the fluid in the forma- tion (freshwater mud = 189 µsec/ft; saltwater mud = 185 µsec/ft)

Unconsolidated Formations

The Wyllie et al. (1958) formula for calculating sonic porosity can be used to determine porosity in consolidated sandstones and carbonates with inter- granular porosity (grainstones) or intercrystalline porosity (sucrosic dolomites). However, when sonic

where:

C p = compaction factor

The compaction factor is obtained from the follow- ing formula:

where:

factor is obtained from the follow- ing formula: wh ere: 4.4 t s h = int

4.4

t sh = interval transit time in a shale adjacent to the formation of interest. C = a constant which is normally 1.0 (Hilchie,

1978).

Interval transit time values from selected depths on

Table 4.1. Sonic Velocities and Interval Transit Times for Different Matrixes. These constants are used in the sonic porosity formulas above (after Schlumberger, 1972).

Lithology/ Fluid

Matrix velocity

t matrix or t fluid (Wyllie) µsec/ft [µsec/m]

t matrix (RHG) µsec/ft [µsec/m]

ft/sec

Sandstone

18,000 to 19,500

55.5 to 51.0 [182 to 168]

56

[184]

Limestone

21,000 to 23,000

47.6

[156]

49

[161]

Dolomite

23,000 to 26,000

43.5

[143]

44

[144]

Anhydrite

20,000

50.0

[164]

 

Salt

15,000

66.7

[219]

 

Casing (iron)

17,500

57.0

[187]

 

Freshwater mud filtrate

5,280

189

[620]

 

Saltwater mud filtrate

5,980

185

[607]

 

Porosity Logs

39

the log in Figure 4.1 are listed in Table 4.5. Those val- ues are used in the chart in Figure 4.2 to determine sonic porosity, which is listed in Table 4.6.

Hydrocarbon Effects

The interval transit time (t) of a formation is increased due to the presence of hydrocarbons (i.e., hydrocarbon effect). If the effect of hydrocarbons is not corrected, the sonic-derived porosity is too high. Hilchie (1978) suggests the following empirical cor- rections for hydrocarbon effect:

following e mpiric al cor- rections for hydrocarbon effect: (gas) 4.5 (oil) 4.6 DENSIT Y LOG
following e mpiric al cor- rections for hydrocarbon effect: (gas) 4.5 (oil) 4.6 DENSIT Y LOG

(gas)

4.5

(oil)

4.6

DENSITY LOG

Density is measured in grams per cubic centimeter, g/cm 3 (or Kg/m 3 or Mg/m 3 ), and is indicated by the Greek letter ρ (rho). Two separate density values are used by the density log: the bulk density (ρ b or RHOB) and the matrix density (ρ ma ). The bulk density is the density of the entire formation (solid and fluid parts) as measured by the logging tool. The matrix density is the density of the solid framework of the rock. It may be thought of as the density of a particular rock type (e.g., limestone or sandstone) that has no porosity. Since the late 1970s, the density log has also been used for the photoelectric-effect measurement (P e , PE, or PEF) to determine lithology of a formation. The den- sity log can assist the geologist to:

• identify evaporite minerals

• detect gas-bearing zones

• determine hydrocarbon density

• evaluate shaly-sand reservoirs and complex lith- ologies (Schlumberger, 1972) The density logging tool has a relatively shallow depth of investigation, and as a result, is held against the side of the borehole during logging to maximize its response to the formation. The tool is comprised of a medium-energy gamma ray source (cobalt 60, cesium 137, or in some newer designs, an accelerator-based source). Two gamma ray detectors provide some mea- sure of compensation for borehole conditions (similar to the sonic logging tool). When the emitted gamma rays collide with elec- trons in the formation, the collisions result in a loss of energy from the gamma ray particle. The scattered

gamma rays that return to the detectors in the tool are measured in two energy ranges. The number of return- ing gamma rays in the higher energy range, affected by Compton scattering, is proportional to the electron density of the formation. For most earth materials of interest in hydrocarbon exploration, the electron den- sity is related to formation bulk density through a con- stant (Tittman and Wahl, 1965), and the bulk density is related to porosity. Gamma ray interactions in the lower energy range are governed by the photoelectric effect. The response from this energy range is strong- ly dependent on lithology and only very slightly dependent on porosity. The bulk-density curve (RHOB) is recorded in tracks 2 and 3 (Figure 4.3). The photoelectric-effect curve (P e in barns per electron, b/e) is displayed in either track 2 or track 3, with its placement set to min- imize its overlap with the bulk-density curve. A cor- rection curve (DRHO in g/cm 3 or Kg/m 3 ), is also dis- played in either track 2 or track 3 (Figure 4.3). This curve indicates how much correction has been added to the bulk-density curve during processing due to borehole effects (primarily mudcake thickness) and is used primarily as a quality-control indicator. Whenev- er the correction curve (DRHO) exceeds 0.20 g/cm 3 , the value of the bulk density obtained from the bulk- density curve (RHOB) should be considered suspect and possibly invalid. A density-derived porosity curve (DPHI) is sometimes present in tracks 2 and 3 along with the bulk-density (RHOB) and correction (DRHO) curves. Track 1 usually contains a gamma ray log and a caliper (Figure 4.3). The photoelectric-effect curve appeared as part of the second-generation density tools, which are com- monly referred to as Litho or Spectral tools and were introduced around 1978. Formation bulk density (ρ b ) is a function of matrix density, porosity, and density of the fluid in the pores (saltwater mud, freshwater mud, or hydrocarbons). To determine density porosity, either by chart (Figure 4.4) or by calculation, the matrix density (Table 4.2) and type of fluid in the formation must be known. The for- mula for calculating density porosity is:

where:

The for- mula for calculating density porosity is: where: 4.7 φ D = density derived porosity

4.7

φ D = density derived porosity ρ ma = matrix density (see Table 4.2 for values) ρ b = formation bulk density (the log reading) ρ fl = fluid density (see Table 4.2 for values)

40

ASQUITH AND KRYGOWSKI

Table 4.2. Matrix densities and photoelectric-effect (P e ) values of common lithologies (Courtesy Halliburton, 1991).

Lithology/

ρ ma or ρ fl g/cm 3 [Kg/m 3 ]

 

Fluid

P e (b/e)

Sandstone

2.644

[2644]

1.81

Limestone

2.710

[2710]

5.08

Dolomite

2.877

[2877]

3.14

Anhydrite

2.960

[2960]

5.05

Salt

2.040

[2040]

4.65

Fresh water

1.0 [1000]

 

Salt water

1.15 [1150]

 

Barite (mud

 

267

additive)

Importance of Correct ρ ma and ρ fl values

A computer in the logging unit calculates density porosity from the measured bulk density of the forma- tion using Equation 4.7. The wellsite geologist or log- ging unit engineer specifies the matrix and fluid den- sities that are to be used. If the formation’s actual matrix density (ρ ma ) is less than the matrix density used to calculate the porosity [e.g., calculating porosi- ty of a sandstone (ρ ma = 2.64 g/cm 3 ) using a limestone matrix density (ρ ma = 2.71 g/cm 3 )], the log shows a calculated porosity that is higher than the actual poros-

ity of the formation. If the formation’s actual fluid den- sity is less than the fluid density used to calculate the porosity [e.g., calculating the porosity of a saltwater-

filled formation

= 1.1 g/cm 3 ) using a freshwater

value (ρ fl = 1.0 g/cm 3 )], the log shows a calculated porosity that is lower than the actual porosity of the formation. Because of the wider range of matrix-den- sity values than fluid-density values, errors in estimat- ing the matrix density have a larger impact on the cal- culated porosity. Bulk-density values from selected depths on the log in Figure 4.3 are listed in Table 4.7. Those values are used in the chart in Figure 4.4 to determine density porosity, which is listed in Table 4.8.

(ρ fl

Hydrocarbon Effects

Where invasion of a formation is shallow, the low density of the formation’s hydrocarbons causes the calculated density porosity to be greater than the actu- al porosity. Oil does not significantly affect density porosity, but gas does (gas effect). Hilchie (1978) sug- gests using a gas density of 0.7 g/cm 3 for fluid densi-

ty (ρ fl ) in the density-porosity formula if gas density is unknown. Because the presence of oil has little effect on the density log, this tool usually provides the best indication of porosity in liquid-filled holes.

Heavy Minerals

Any time the bulk density of a formation (ρ b ) is greater than the assumed matrix density (ρ ma ) of the formation [e.g., when measurements are made in an anhydrite (ρ ma = 2.96 g/cm 3 ) but are recorded using a limestone matrix (ρ ma = 2.71 g/cm 3 )], the resulting density porosity is negative. It is important to note that in cases like this the logging tool is operating proper- ly, but the assumptions made in the conversion between bulk density and density porosity are incor- rect. In cases like this, where the porosity is clearly erroneous (because it is negative), the log still yields good information. Negative density porosity is often a good indication of the presence of anhydrite or other heavy minerals, as shown in Figure 4.5 over the inter- vals 11,550 to 11,567 ft and 11,600 to 11,618 ft. Powdered barite is commonly added to mud to increase mud density. When heavy muds are used (e.g., 14 lb/gal), the high P e of the barite (Table 4.2) in the mud can mask the P e of the adjacent rock layers.

NEUTRON LOG

Neutron logs are porosity logs that measure the hydrogen concentration in a formation. In clean for- mations (i.e., shale-free) where the porosity is filled with water or oil, the neutron log measures liquid- filled porosity (φ N , PHIN, or NPHI). Neutrons are created from a chemical source in the neutron logging tool. The chemical source is usually a mixture of americium and beryllium which continu- ously emit neutrons. When these neutrons collide with the nuclei of the formation the neutron loses some of its energy. With enough collisions, the neutron is absorbed by a nucleus and a gamma ray is emitted. Because the hydrogen atom is almost equal in mass to the neutron, maximum energy loss occurs when the neutron collides with a hydrogen atom. Therefore, the energy loss is dominated by the formation’s hydrogen concentration. Because hydrogen in a porous forma- tion is concentrated in the fluid-filled pores, energy loss can be related to the formation’s porosity. The neutron curves are commonly displayed over tracks 2 and 3, in units referenced to a specific lithol- ogy (usually either limestone or sandstone, depending on the geologic environment expected to be encoun- tered), as illustrated in Figure 4.5.

Neutron log responses vary, depending on:

• differences in detector types and what they detect (gamma rays and/or neutrons of different energies)

• spacing between source and detector

• lithology (i.e., sandstone, limestone, and dolo- mite) While the variations due to detector types and tool design are fixed (and are accounted for in the data pro- cessing), the variations in response due to lithology must be accounted for by using the appropriate charts (Figures 4.6 and 4.7). A geologist should remember that the responses of different neutron logs differ from each other (unlike all other logs) and must be inter- preted from the specific chart designed for a specific log (i.e., Schlumberger charts for Schlumberger logs and Halliburton charts for Halliburton logs). The rea- son for this is that while other logs are calibrated in basic physical units, neutron logs are not (Dresser Atlas, 1975). Table 4.11 shows the results of lithology correc- tions that are made to neutron measurements using the correct and incorrect charts for the specific neutron tool. The first neutron logs detected the gamma rays that were products of neutron capture by formation nuclei. Initially, each logging company had its own calibra- tion system, but eventually the American Petroleum Institute (API) developed calibration pits to provide a common standard for measurement (Serra, 1984). Generally these logs were displayed in counts per sec- ond (cps) or API Neutron Units rather than porosity. Although charts to convert from displayed units to porosity exist (Bassiouni, 1994), arbitrary conversions using core data or estimated formation porosities have most often been used. It should be noted that the neu- tron log response is inversely proportional to porosity so that low-measurement unit values correspond to high porosities, and high-measurement unit values correspond to low porosities. The first modern neutron log (where porosity was directly displayed) was the sidewall neutron log. Like the density log (and for the same reason of limited depth of investigation), the sidewall neutron log has both the source and detector in a pad that is pushed against the side of the borehole. Although the sidewall neutron log was relatively insensitive to lithologic effects, it was sensitive to borehole effects, such as rugosity (roughness) which caused measurement diffi- culties. The most commonly used neutron log is the com- pensated neutron log which has a neutron source and

Porosity Logs

41

two detectors. Like the sidewall neutron log, it direct- ly displays values of porosity. The advantage of com- pensated neutron logs over sidewall neutron logs is that they are less affected by borehole irregularities. Both the sidewall and compensated neutron logs can be recorded in apparent limestone, sandstone, or dolomite porosity units. If a formation is limestone, and the neutron log is recorded in apparent limestone porosity units, apparent porosity is equal to true poros- ity. However, when the lithology of a formation is sandstone or dolomite, apparent limestone porosity must be corrected to true porosity by using the appro- priate chart (Figure 4.6 illustrates the lithology correc- tions for one model of Halliburton neutron log, and Figure 4.7 the corrections for a Schlumberger neutron log). The procedure is identical for each of the charts and is shown in Figures 4.6 and 4.7. Neutron-porosity values from selected depths on the log in Figure 4.5 are listed in Table 4.9. Those val- ues are used in the chart in Figure 4.6 to determine sonic porosity, which is listed in Table 4.10.

Hydrocarbon effects

Whenever pores are filled with gas rather than oil or water, the reported neutron porosity is less than the actual formation porosity. This occurs because there is a lower concentration of hydrogen in gas than in oil or water. This lower concentration is not accounted for by the processing software of the logging tool, and thus is interpreted as low porosity. A decrease in neutron porosity by the presence of gas is called gas effect.

Shale Effect

Whenever clays are part of the formation matrix, the reported neutron porosity is greater than the actual formation porosity. This occurs because the hydrogen that is within the clay’s structure and in the water bound to the clay is sensed in addition to the hydrogen in the pore space. Because the processing software of the logging tool expects all hydrogen in the formation to reside in the pores, the extra hydrogen is interpreted as being part of the porosity. An increase in neutron porosity by the presence of clays is called shale effect.

POROSITY MEASUREMENT COMBINATIONS

Although the advent of porosity logs provided a substantial improvement in log interpretation, the sig- nificant change, from a geological viewpoint, was the development of interpretive techniques that combined the measurements from different porosity tools. With

42 ASQUITH AND KRYGOWSKI

combinations of two or three measurements, lithology could be interpreted (rather than having to be known) and a better estimate of porosity produced. The inter- pretation of lithology and porosity is accomplished through crossplots. These are x-y plots of the quanti- ties of interest, usually overlain with lines for “pure” lithologies (normally sandstone, limestone, and dolomite) with porosity indicated on each lithology line (e.g., Figure 4.11).

Neutron-density Combination:

Quick-look Lithology and Porosity

The combination of the neutron and density meas- urements is probably the most widely used porosity log combination. The neutron-density log display con- sists of neutron-porosity (NPHI) and density-porosity (DPHI) curves recorded in tracks 2 and 3 (Figure 4.5) and a caliper (CALI) and gamma ray (GR) in track 1. Both the neutron and density curves are normally recorded in limestone porosity units, however, porosi- ty referenced to sandstone and dolomite can also be recorded. The extensive use of the neutron-density combina- tion may be due in part to the fact that they were among the first logging tools that could be physically combined and their data acquired in a single logging run. The response of the combination is such that for reconnaissance evaluation one can forego the crossplot and rely on recognition of the curve patterns (the posi- tion of the curves with respect to each other) to quick- ly determine the most likely predominant lithology and formation porosity. Figure 4.8 illustrates the use of the neutron-density

combination to determine formation lithology and to estimate porosity. The reconnaissance technique works best with the following constraints:

• Both the neutron and density curves are in porosity (decimal or percent) referenced to lime- stone units.

• The formations are clean (no clays in the forma- tions).

• There is no gas in the formations, only water or oil. Using only the neutron-porosity and density-poros- ity curves, single lithologies can be predicted with lit- tle ambiguity. Adding the gamma ray may help, as in identifying dolomite from shale. In mixed lithologies, such as the sandy limestone and sandy dolomite shown, even the addition of the gamma ray does not help. If the density log is of the newer litho or spectral type and a photoelectric curve (P e ) is available, the ambiguity can be further lessened, especially in the case of mixed lithologies. The value of the P e curve in mixed lithologies falls between the single lithology value of each member, so some distinction can be made. Table 4.3 summarizes the patterns and values for common lithologies. The estimation of porosity is equally straightfor- ward: the formation porosity can be estimated to with- in about 2 porosity units (0.02) by taking the average of the neutron porosity and density porosity. In areas of the world where sand and shale intervals predominate, the neutron and density are referenced to sandstone rather than limestone to eliminate the need for matrix conversion. (This also helps highlight the gas crossover effect described below.) While Figure

Table 4.3. Estimation of formation lithologies using the neutron-density combination (Campaign, W. J., personal communication). Neutron and density are run with a limestone matrix; formation is water filled or oil filled

Lithology

φ N and φ D

P

e

Sandstone

Neutron-density crossover (φ N > φ D ) of 6 to 8 porosity units.

less than 2

Limestone

Neutron and density curves overlay (φ N ∼ φ D ).

about 5

Dolomite

Neutron-density separation (φ N < φ D ) of 12 to 14 porosity units.

about 3

Anhydrite

Neutron porosity is greater than density porosity (φ N > φ D ) by 14 porosity units or more. φ N zero.

about 5

Salt

Neutron porosity is slightly less than zero. Density porosity is 40 porosity units (0.40) or more. Watch for washed out hole (large caliper values) and bad density data.

4.7

4.8 focuses on lithology changes in clean (clay-free) formations with widely varying lithologies, Figure 4.9 illustrates neutron and density patterns in a variety of shaly sands, with both porosities referenced to sand- stone. The effects of gas and clays are greater on the neutron measurement than on the density, with the neutron simultaneously being driven lower by gas and higher by clays in a shaly gassy formation. The exact location of the neutron curve with respect to the den- sity curve is determined by the amounts of clay and gas present in the formation. Table 4.12 shows the quick-look lithology determi- nation in Figure 4.8 applied to the data in Figure 4.5.

Neutron-density Combination: Gas Detection

Another technique using the neutron and density logs and the identification of curve patterns is that of gas identification. Gas in the pores causes the density porosity to be too high (gas has a lower density than oil or water) and causes the neutron porosity to be too low (there is a lower concentration of hydrogen atoms in gas than in oil or water). Figure 4.10 shows an example of a gas zone. In that zone, the neutron poros- ity is less than the density porosity, and the two poros- ity curves cross over each other. This is called cross- over. The magnitude of the crossover (the amount of separation between the curves) is qualitatively related to the gas saturation, however, the crossover is more strongly influenced (again qualitatively) by the forma- tion pressure. Low-pressure zones, either at shallow depths or depleted from production, tend to show large crossover. Neutron-density crossover can also be caused by lithologic effects, as when the curves are displayed referenced to a lithology that is different from the actu- al lithology of the formation. Figure 4.8 illustrates this in the sandstone formations with the curves displayed referenced to limestone. It is important to check the log header for lithology-reference information as well as knowing the actual lithology of the formation in question before predicting the presence of gas from the log patterns only. The porosity of a gas-bearing formation can be esti- mated by either form of the following equation:

where:

mated b y either form of the following equation: where: 4.8 φ N D g a

4.8

φ NDgas = porosity of the gas-bearing formation φ N = neutron porosity φ D = density porosity

Porosity Logs

43

Porosity Combinations: Crossplots

Crossplots are a graphical way to solve fairly com- plex relationships using two (or three) porosity meas- urements to estimate formation lithology and porosity. All these crossplots have the same general format: one measurement is displayed along the x-axis, and anoth- er is displayed along the y-axis. The measurements are either in porosity units referenced to limestone or, in the case of density and sonic logs, they can be in the original measurement units (ρ b in g/cm 3 or Kg/m 3 for the density, and t in µsec/ft or µsec/m for the sonic). Superimposed on the plot (as an overlay) are pure lithology lines, usually sandstone, limestone, and dolomite. Porosity is indicated along each of these lines. See Figure 4.11 as an example. In the interpretation, the values of the two meas- urements of interest are plotted on the crossplot. The intersection of those values on the plot determines both the porosity and the lithology of the point. If the point lies between two lithology lines, the lithology is taken as a mixture of those two lithologies (with the dominant lithology being that of the line closest to the point). The porosity is estimated by joining points of equal porosity on the two lithology lines and interpo- lating between the lines of equal porosity. Figure 4.11 illustrates the interpretive process. It should be noted that not all interpretations are unique. In fact, the data often plot in such a way that there are two possible lithology pairs, and the decision of which to chose lies with the interpreter’s knowledge of the area (or the application of other data). In some plots, as noted below and shown in the accompanying figures, the choice of lithologic pair significantly affects the predicted porosity value. Other minerals can also be plotted on the crossplot, as distinct points (rather than lines indicating varying porosity). Figure 4.11 shows the location of halite and anhydrite. Log values for other pure minerals are available in the log interpretation chartbooks provided by most well log (wireline and MWD) acquisition companies. Although the existence of pure (and thick) beds of some minerals is very rare, the location of the mineral point on the crossplot (and the shift of the data toward that point) may sometimes give some indica- tion that the mineral is present in the formation of interest. Table 4.4 details the advantages and limitations of each of the four crossplots. The crossplots are listed in the order of preference of use, from top to bottom. Figures 4.11 to 4.14 and Tables 4.13 to 4.15 illus- trate the determination of porosity and lithology using the first three crossplot techniques in Table 4.4.

44 ASQUITH AND KRYGOWSKI

Table 4.4. Comparison of porosity crossplots (in order of preference of use)

Crossplot

Advantages

Limitations

Neutron Density

Given two possible lithology pair solutions,

In rough holes or in heavy drilling muds, the density data might be invalid.

(Figure 4.11)

the porosity remains relatively invariant between solutions.

The combination of neutron and density is the most common of all porosity tool pairs.

 

Neutron Sonic

Given two possible lithology pair solutions, the porosity remains relatively invariant between solutions.

The sonic is less sensitive to rough holes than the density.

The combination of sonic and neutron data (without the density) is not common.

(Figure 4.12)

 

Spectral Density (bulk density-P e ) (Figure 4.13)

Both measurements are made with the same logging tool; both will be available in newer wells.

The choice of lithology pair will have a significant effect of the estimation of porosity. In rough holes or in heavy drilling mud, the data may be invalid. The P e measurement will not be present in wells logged before about 1978.

Sonic Density

Best for identifying radioactive reservoirs, rather than predicting lithology and porosity:

The choice of lithology pair has a significant effect on the estimation of porosity.

(Figure 4.14)

Potential reservoirs plot along the closely spaced lithology lines while shales tend to fall toward the lower right of the plot. This can indicate the presence of radioactive reservoirs which are intermingled with shales (which tend to have high radioactivity).

The lithology lines are closely spaced, so any uncertainty in the measurements produces large changes in the lithology and porosity estimates.

Extending the Crossplot Technique

Given that the use of two porosity measurements can lead to the prediction of a more lithologically complex subsurface (i.e., the formation described as a two-mineral mixture), the natural extension is to use three measurements to estimate a ternary mixture. There are two different techniques, with one having two variations. Both techniques are more concerned with determining lithology than with determining porosity, the porosity having been determined from the previous two-measurement crossplots (usually the neutron-density).

M-N Lithology Plots

This technique is the oldest of the three-measure- ment lithology techniques, and was based on combin- ing the three porosity measurements in such a way so that two quantities could be used in a crossplot. The two calculated quantities are:

measurements in such a way so that two quantities could be used in a crossplot. The

4.9

Table 4.5. Values to be used with the chart in Figure 4.2 to determine the sonic porosity, SPHI.

Porosity Logs

45

Depth

 

Raw Data

 

SPHI (Wyllie)

SPHI (RHG)

DPHI

NPHI

DT

RHOB

PE

NPHI

Lime

Dolo

Lime

Dolo

Lime

Dolo

Dolo

Sand

11,508

51

                     

11,522

47

                     

11,545

57

                     

11,560

48

                     

11,593

50

                     

11,615

51

                     

11,631

67

                     

11,645

52

                     

11,655

57

                     

11,665

52

                     

11,696

50

                     

Table 4.6. Determination of sonic porosity by two methods.

Depth

 

Raw Data

 

SPHI (Wyllie)

SPHI (RHG)

DPHI

NPHI

DT

RHOB

PE

NPHI

Lime

Dolo

Lime

Dolo

Lime

Dolo

Dolo

Sand

11,508

51

     

0.024

0.051

0.053

0.110

       

11,522

47

     

0.000

0.025

0.000

0.060

       

11,545

57

     

0.067

0.092

0.125

0.170

       

11,560

48

     

0.005

0.031

0.010

0.073

       

11,593

50

     

0.017

0.045

0.040

0.098

       

11,615

51

     

0.024

0.051

0.053

0.010

       

11,631

67

     

0.138

0.163

0.203

0.235

       

11,645

52

     

0.032

0.059

0.070

0.122

       

11,655

57

     

0.067

0.092

0.125

0.170

       

11,665

52

     

0.032

0.059

0.070

0.122

       

11,696

50

     

0.017

0.045

0.040

0.098

       

46 ASQUITH AND KRYGOWSKI

Table 4.7. Values to be used with the chart in Figure 4.4 to determine the density porosity, DPHI.

Depth

 

Raw Data

 

SPHI (Wyllie)

SPHI (RHG)

 

DPHI

 

NPHI

DT

RHOB

PE

NPHI

Lime

Dolo

Lime

Dolo

Lime

Dolo

Dolo

Sand

11,508

51

     

0.024

0.051

0.053

0.110

       

11,522

47

2.75

   

0.000

0.025

0.000

0.060

       

11,545

57

     

0.067

0.092

0.125

0.170

       

11,560

48

     

0.005

0.031

0.010

0.073

       

11,593

50

     

0.017

0.045

0.040

0.098

       

11,615

51

     

0.024

0.051

0.053

0.010

       

11,631

67

2.50

   

0.138

0.163

0.203

0.235

       

11,645

52

     

0.032

0.059

0.070

0.122

       

11,655

57

2.64

   

0.067

0.092

0.125

0.170

       

11,665

52

2.68

   

0.032

0.059

0.070

0.122

       

11,696

50

     

0.017

0.045

0.040

0.098

       

Table 4.8. Determination of density porosity.

 

Depth

 

Raw Data

 

SPHI (Wyllie)

SPHI (RHG)

 

DPHI

 

NPHI

DT

RHOB

PE

NPHI

Lime

Dolo

Lime

Dolo

Lime

Dolo

Dolo

Sand

11,508

51

2.73

   

0.024

0.051

0.053

0.110

-0.013

0.078

   

11,522

47

2.75

   

0.000

0.025

0.000

0.060

-0.022

0.068

   

11,545

57

2.67

   

0.067

0.092

0.125

0.170

0.022

0.110

   

11,560

48

2.96

   

0.005

0.031

0.010

0.073

<

0

<

0

   

11,593

50

2.70

   

0.017

0.045

0.040

0.098

0.005

0.095

   

11,615

51

2.97

   

0.024

0.051

0.053

0.010

<

0

<

0

   

11,631

67

2.50

   

0.138

0.163

0.203

0.235

0.125

0.200

   

11,645

52

2.82

   

0.032

0.059

0.070

0.122

<

0

0.030

   

11,655

57

2.64

   

0.067

0.092

0.125

0.170

0.042

0.125

   

11,665

52

2.68

   

0.032

0.059

0.070

0.122

0.020

0.105

   

11,696

50

2.76

   

0.017

0.045

0.040

0.098

-0.028

0.063

   

Table 4.9. Values will be used with the chart in Figure 4.4 to determine the neutron porosity, NPHI, referenced to other lithologies (dolomite and sandstone).

 

Porosity Logs

47

Depth

 

Raw Data

 

SPHI (Wyllie)

SPHI (RHG)

 

DPHI

   

NPHI

 

DT

RHOB

PE

NPHI

Lime

Dolo

Lime

Dolo

Lime

Dolo

Dolo

Sand

11,508

51

2.73

   

0.024

0.051

0.053

0.110

-0.013

0.078

   

11,522

47

2.75

 

0.090

0.000

0.025

0.000

0.060

-0.022

0.068

   

11,545

57

2.67

   

0.067

0.092

0.125

0.170

0.022

0.110

   

11,560

48

2.96

   

0.005

0.031

0.010

0.073

<

0

<

0

   

11,593

50

2.70

   

0.017

0.045

0.040

0.098

0.005

0.095

   

11,615

51

2.97

   

0.024

0.051

0.053

0.010

<

0

<

0

   

11,631

67

2.50

 

0.290

0.138

0.163

0.203

0.235

0.125

0.200

   

11,645

52

2.82

   

0.032

0.059

0.070

0.122

<

0

0.030

   

11,655

57

2.64

 

0.160

0.067

0.092

0.125

0.170

0.042

0.125

   

11,665

52

2.68

 

0.010

0.032

0.059

0.070

0.122

0.020

0.105

   

11,696

50

2.76

   

0.017

0.045

0.040

0.098

-0.028

0.063

   

Table 4.10. Lithology conversions for the neutron log.

 

Depth

 

Raw Data

 

SPHI (Wyllie)

SPHI (RHG)

 

DPHI

   

NPHI

 

DT

RHOB

PE

NPHI

Lime

Dolo

Lime

Dolo

Lime

Dolo

Dolo

Sand

11,508

51

2.73

 

0.005

0.024

0.051

0.053

0.110

-0.013

0.078

<

0

0.015

11,522

47

2.75

 

0.090

0.000

0.025

0.000

0.060

-0.022

0.068

0.070

0.140

11,545

57

2.67

 

0.130

0.067

0.092

0.125

0.170

0.022

0.110

0.105

0.185

11,560

48

2.96

 

-0.010

0.005

0.031

0.010

0.073

<

0

<

0

< 0

<

0

11,593

50

2.70

 

0.000

0.017

0.045

0.040

0.098

0.005

0.095

< 0

0.015

11,615

51

2.97

 

-0.010

0.024

0.051

0.053

0.010

<

0

<

0

< 0

<

0

11,631

67

2.50

 

0.290

0.138

0.163

0.203

0.235

0.125

0.200

0.250

0.365

11,645

52

2.82

 

0.140

0.032

0.059

0.070

0.122

<

0

0.030

0.115

0.200

11,655

57

2.64

 

0.160

0.067

0.092

0.125

0.170

0.042

0.125

0.135

0.220

11,665

52

2.68

 

0.010

0.032

0.059

0.070

0.122

0.020

0.105

< 0

0.030

11,696

50

2.76

 

0.010

0.017

0.045

0.040

0.098

<

0

0.063

< 0

0.030

48 ASQUITH AND KRYGOWSKI

Table 4.11. Differences in neutron porosity using correct and incorrect charts for the specific neutron tool.

Zone

 

Log Values

 

NPHI (incorrect chart for the example data)

 

NPHI (incorrect chart for the example data)

Depth

NPHI

 

RHOB

DT

dolo

sand

dolo

sand

11,508

             

11,631

0.29

 

2.50

67

0.250

0.365

0.210

0.335

11,645

             

11,655

0.16

 

2.64

57

0.135

0.220

0.080

0.210

11,665

0.01

 

2.68

52

< 0

0.030

< 0

0.040

11,696

             

Table 4.12. Lithology determination on the data from the intervals in Figure 4.5, using the curve patterns in Figure 4.8.

 

Depth

 

Zone range

   

Raw Data

 

ND Quicklook

 

RHOB

DPHI

 

PE

 

NPHI

Lithology

 

11,508

 

11,490-11,518

2.73

-0.013

 

5.0

 

0.005

Limestone

 

11,522

 

11,518-11,528

2.75

-0.022

 

3.2

 

0.090

Dolomite

 
   

11,528-11,543

       

Dolomite w/anhydrite

11,545

 

11,543-11,546

2.67

0.020

 

3.7

 

0.130

Dolomite

 

11,560

 

11,546-11,570

2.96

<

0

 

4.8

 

-0.010

Anhydrite

 
   

11,570-11,580

       

Dolomite (w/anhydrite?)

11,593

 

11,580-11,598

2.70

0.005

 

5.6

 

0.000

Limestone

 

11,615

 

11,598-11,625

2.97

<

0

 

5.1

 

-0.010

Anhydrite

 

11,631

 

11,625-11,641

2.50

0.125

 

3.8

 

0.290

Dolomite

 

11,645

 

11,641-11,649

2.82

<

0

 

3.5

 

0.140

Dolomite (w/anhydrite?)

11,655

 

11,649-11,659

2.64

0.042

 

3.5

 

0.160

Dolomite

 

11,665

 

11,659-11,680

2.68

0.020

 

5.5

 

0.010

Limestone

 

11,696

 

> 11680

2.76

-0.028

 

5.1

 

0.010

Limestone w/anhydrite

where:

  5.1   0.010 Limestone w/anhydrite where: 4.10 ∆ t = int erval trans i t

4.10

t = interval transit time in the formation (from the log) t fl = interval transit time in the fluid in the forma- tion ρ b = formation bulk density (from the log) ρ fl = fluid density φ N = neutron porosity (in limestone units, from the log)

φ Nfl = neutron porosity of the fluid of the formation (usually = 1.0) Figure 4.15 shows the resulting plot. As in the two- mineral crossplots, a number of common mineral points are plotted. For the common minerals (litholo- gies) of interest (quartz [sandstone], calcite [lime- stone], and dolomite), each mineral is associated with a group of points. The open and closed circles con- nected by dashed lines indicate the location of the point in freshwater and saltwater muds, respectively. The groups of these connected points indicate ranges in porosity.

Table 4.13. Log values from Figures 4.1, 4.3, and 4.5, used to determine porosity and lithology.

Porosity Logs

49

   

Raw Data

 

Neutron-Density Crossplot

Depth

DT

RHOB

PE

NPHI

Lithology

PhiND

11,508

51

2.73

5.0

0.005

Limestone

0.000

11,522

47

2.75

3.2

0.090

Dolomite

0.070

11,545

57

2.67

3.7

0.130

Dolomite

0.110

11,560

48

2.96

4.8

-0.010

Anhydrite

0.000

11,593

50

2.70

5.6

0.000

Limestone

0.000

11,615

51

2.97

5.1

-0.010

Anhydrite

0.000

11,631

67

2.50

3.8

0.290

Dolomite (w/anhydrite?)

0.230

11,645

52

2.82

3.5

0.140

Dolomite (w/anhydrite?)

0.100

11,655

57

2.64

3.5

0.160

Dolomite

0.130

11,665

52

2.68

5.5

0.010

Limestone

0.010

11,696

50

2.76

5.1

0.010

Dolomitic limestone

0.005

Table 4.14. Log values from Figures 4.1, 4.3, and 4.5, used to determine porosity and lithology.

 
   

Raw Data

 

Neutron-Sonic Crossplot

Depth

DT